Tay-sachs Disease More Condition_symptoms

Pubblicità 10

The influence of advertising on politics has become huge, and heavy, in the 90s here. Not only because the candidates are increasingly being chosen according to the photogenic and the ability to speak and not for their quality (in the U.S. there was the sensational case of Ronald Reagan): This is now a really profound change, and that is going to directly affect our lives. From us, just a couple of years ago, a prominent politician has made a long speech (there is video recording) does not like talking politics or values \u200b\u200bas ideas but in terms of market share of advertising, of investments must have a return. Needless to name a name: he is from advertising.

With this political class, especially in Lombardy and the Lombard policy, the words have become more frequent loyalty, smart cards, target, discount, and so on. The other day I requested a PIN for the smart health card (sorry, "Card Services"), which is mandatory if you want to have medical care, and on the printed page, as the first word I found says "Thank you for chosen ", which is really - how to say? - Curious, paradoxical, but if those rules you will be from advertising and marketing, we can expect this and more. Another
operazione tipica dei pubblicitari è quella di cambiare il nome a qualcosa che già c’era, spacciandolo per novità: cambiare nome ai ministeri, ai vigili urbani, ai partiti stessi. Il servizio di riscossione tributi è diventato “Equitalia” (che bel nome: peccato che le funzioni siano esattamente le stesse, se non pagate vi pignorano la casa), la tessera di abbonamento al tram è diventata “Itinero” (parola sdrucciola: si pronuncia “itìnero”, e non “itiñero do Brazil”).
Un altro esempio: in giurisprudenza è stato introdotto il reato di “stalking”, che prima era alla voce “molestie”, e anche “molestie aggravate”. Suddenly, "harassment" It seemed like a harmless word, springs, ineffective: we had to do something new, to show that you were working hard, and broke into the English terms "stalking" and "stalker." Words difficult to pronounce, words whose meaning you do not know (I know since 1979: is a term of hunters, is to follow a path and follow that path through the game, the stalker is a guide, a scout). In short, everything remains as before but with a new term seems to have done God knows what. To stiffen penalties, just add a line to the crime of harassment, but the newspapers would not even talk (and already hear the little voices indignantly: but no, no, not the same thing - and instead, provided this is harassment, aggravated harassment, and if something more goes to another type of crime more serious. These rules have always existed, in the Codes).
So this is purely external operations, then tap more of the same work, do physical labor, to take risks. Changing the words, and make the starting spot, but meanwhile they cut the funds, you reduce staff, and ensure that these are things that go straight to hit the mark. If a police officer who retires is not replaced, then who is to arrest the offenders, pardon "stalkers"? Another

rule of marketing, as opposed to above and very unfair, is to ridicule and make unpleasant "competition." For example, the effective work done on word co-operative: that "working together" is the past, with the Biagi Law and appurtenances, to be synonymous with exploitation. By now, especially among the young and those who are seeking employment, the only known means for "cooperative" is a company that gives you a job for two weeks. Cooper, Cooper, in its true meaning, it means working together, work together: farmers grow vegetables, milk milk, gather together to sell and then share the profits, but without a master. But now, who remembers the most?
These techniques work. One could write an essay, make a movie, a TV series, even making a video game, but publishing, television, videogames, music, everything is now in the hands of advertisers and marketers. This is a dictatorship, it would be nice if you return to freedom.

- Do you think the audience ever?
- No, how could I? What they mean for me? I have to teach them something? I have some means of knowing what to think about John Smith in London and Vasil Ivanov in Moscow? I should really be a hypocrite to claim to know the thoughts, the inner world of another persona. Se voglio creare qualcosa posso farlo solo col mio linguaggio, trattando il pubblico come un partner a pari livello. Se ho qualche problema penso che anche il pubblico lo abbia e cerco di usare il mio film per fare chiarezza per me e per gli spettatori. Non sono né piú intelligente, né piú stupido, la mia dignità è ugualmente vulnerabile. Niente di piú facile che fare un film con lo sguardo rivolto alle tasche degli spettatori, ma non è la mia vocazione...
(ANDREJ TARKOVSKIJ, intervista raccolta a Londra da Irena Brežnà (pubblicata a suo tempo dal mensile “Frigidaire”, circa 1982)

(i fotogrammi qui sopra vengono dal film “Stalker” di Andrej Tarkovskij, anno 1979)